Best in the World

Log in to stop seeing adverts

Status
Not open for further replies.
but you can't go beating someone to the ground because they just might have a weapon in their pocket,did he have one.it seems you are guilty until being proved innocent now.does he look like a violent thug to you,are they the actions of a violent thug ?

:icon_lol::icon_lol::icon_lol: Is this what you used to tell teachers when you got pushed over at school?
 
He didn't arrive in the middle by tardis, he walked, you could therefore assume the police may have approached him before?

And if so...there you go. If he was indeed having some sort of heart attack at this point then well it's all very unfortunate. If he was staggering and could not hear the police warnings and maybe couldn't respond, then the whole thing is a tragedy.

I (without evidence) find it difficult to comprehend that this was the first time the police had ''crossed'' with him?

would the officer involved not have let on by now that the guy had been approached before,it happened last week:102:
 
Any other country and he would have been battered with batons and then arrested. In this country we push him over and there is outrage.

I don't understand this post, what exactly are you saying?
 
The bloke was a bit of a down and out drifter with a drink problem - just helping out his mate on his newspaper stall

He was just shuffling home in the same way he always does - he probably didn't even know the protests were on

Quite why some people think the policeman was justified in commiting a wholly unprovoked physical assault on some old duffer is simply beyond me
 
:icon_roll I meant he didnt have a bag with him or a coat or anything else.

Having been in the City that day I didn't wear a coat - it was warm. No reason for him to wear one either. He was a newspaper vendor, you hardly need to take your tools of the trade with you, therefore no need to carry a bag.
 
The bloke was a bit of a down and out drifter with a drink problem - just helping out his mate on his newspaper stall

He was just shuffling home in the same way he always does - he probably didn't even know the protests were on

Quite why some people think the policeman was justified in commiting a wholly unprovoked physical assault on some old duffer is simply beyond me

indeed homer indeed,but it was just a playful push,the type you got at school apparently:icon_roll
 
Last edited:
must be horrible for him....oh hold on thats what he gets paid for isn't it ?

No he get's paid to prevent (or contain) anarchy and/or riots. If you want to contain an area you have to place a line of protection and ensure that you clear all before you. It's basic riot control.

Since when has that been against the law?

It's not illegal and I never said it was. All I said was that having your hands in your pockets does not put you in a passive stance. In a situation like that any policeman will be wondering if you have anything in your pockets.
 
The bloke was a bit of a down and out drifter with a drink problem - just helping out his mate on his newspaper stall

He was just shuffling home in the same way he always does - he probably didn't even know the protests were on
Quite why some people think the policeman was justified in commiting a wholly unprovoked physical assault on some old duffer is simply beyond me


he should read the papers
 
In which case his heart attack wasn't down to the officer pushing him.

No one is suggesting that at the moment. All I'm saying is that that particular police officer assaulted him. If it had been the other way round he would have been arrested.
 
The bloke was a bit of a down and out drifter with a drink problem - just helping out his mate on his newspaper stall

He was just shuffling home in the same way he always does - he probably didn't even know the protests were on

Quite why some people think the policeman was justified in commiting a wholly unprovoked physical assault on some old duffer is simply beyond me

IF you are willing to assme this, then why can you not assume a different senario?

You have the same evidence (probably) as the rest of us, you just assume whichever scenario suits you!
 
No he get's paid to prevent (or contain) anarchy and/or riots. If you want to contain an area you have to place a line of protection and ensure that you clear all before you. It's basic riot control.


.
so he wouldn't have took the job without expecting rioters to throw missiles ? what did he expect rioters to do exactly ? blow kisses at him ?:102:
 
so he wouldn't have took the job without expecting rioters to throw missiles ? what did he expect rioters to do exactly ? blow kisses at him ?:102:

It's what you did on last year's Gay Pride march, you dirty fecker
 
Having been in the City that day I didn't wear a coat - it was warm. No reason for him to wear one either. He was a newspaper vendor, you hardly need to take your tools of the trade with you, therefore no need to carry a bag.

you do usually need to have some physical diasbility,stink of piss and be a scruffy cnut...i start next wednesday
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Log in to stop seeing adverts

Championship

P Pld Pts
1Leicester4697
2Ipswich4696
3Leeds Utd4690
4Southampton4687
5West Brom4675
6Norwich City4673
7Hull City4670
8Middlesbro4669
9Coventry City4664
10Preston 4663
11Bristol City4662
12Cardiff City4662
13Millwall4659
14Swansea City4657
15Watford4656
16Sunderland4656
17Stoke City4656
18QPR4656
19Blackburn 4653
20Sheffield W4653
21Plymouth 4651
22Birmingham4650
23Huddersfield4645
24Rotherham Utd4627

Latest posts

Top